MRNUTTY wrote:Wordsdrawnigh, thank you for expressing your insights. However, as I discovered, the point of the thread was to keep all this discussion off the board. And I agree with it. So, whatever I believe with regard to the worthy points you bring up, I won't be expressing them on this board anymore. But, I will talk about my studio in the "tell us about your rig" thread see you there!

wordsdrawnigh wrote: I am trans-critical because I am sympathetic to transpeople. I want these people to get psychotherapy before they do something they will come to regret.

This is disingenuous nonsense. People like you are the reason why Wendy Carlos rarely does interviews. How dare you tell people they need psychotherapy.

Ok. So, basically, you are saying that "everything is relative," no one can ever criticize anything anyone else chooses to do, or view it in any way other than how that person views it? How about drug addicts? Is it ok to recommend rehab to them? Or do we have to pretend that drug addiction is perfectly fine as well, and use tax dollars to create public "drug-using stations" so as not to discriminate against them?

I don't mean that every single trans person needs to literally see a psychotherapist, but I do not think transgenderism is compatible with psychological health; it is a complete pseudoscientific fantasy. There is no legitimacy to the idea of a "brain-sex" (http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/11/ ... tudy-finds). Transgenderism never even existed before its "fulfillment" became possible in the form of modern cosmetic surgery and hormone replacement therapy.

I have personally had the feeling of being "a woman born in a man's body"; I don't feel like I fit perfectly inside my "assigned gender," but transgenderism actually essentializes gender, by attaching it to a specific sex. If they are really "transcending gender," then why do they care what their genitals look like? It's like in Iran, where if you are gay, you can act out your "femininity," but only if you get a sex change operation. Transgenderism reinforces gender stereotypes, such that in order to "perform femininity," they feel the need to take on the superficial appearance of a woman. The only thing this is transcending is "the limitations of the flesh." What if I don't like my eye color ("my eyes feel blue on the inside"); should I get an eye transplant to change them? Transgenderism is really just the vanguard of transhumanism, the completely insane idea that humans can "merge" with technology.

Every single one of your posts has ridiculed those people and have illustrated a deep bias against them. Don't pretend you give a damn about them. Below are quotes from every post you made on this thread. The bold illustrates blatant ridicule and the underlined indicates your incredulity/bias.

Ok, well, I can respect the "rights of transpeople" (which are the same rights as anyone else), while not accepting the notion that people can change their sex.

Trans-people are free to see themselves however they want, and do whatever they want to their own bodies (though I may personally view it as unhealthy mutilation, encouraged by the "sex change" industry), but I take issue when I am told that I must go along with this mass delusion.

I think the ideal solution is individual uninsex bathrooms, for those who do not feel comfortable with their "gender identity." This way, they can avoid harassment while not infringing on the rights of women to have safe spaces. But this is never enough; the transwomen always demand that everyone else, including biological women, see them as completely indistinguishable from "women."

Since transwomen are biological men, they are just as likely to commit rape, especially considering many choose not to have "bottom surgery" (e.g. Dana McCallum). Allowing anyone who "self-identifies as a woman" into women's restrooms and locker rooms also invites perverted men to exploit this.

The above quote is an appeal to emotion fallacy (fear). Rapists rape...maybe if we don't have ANY public restrooms everyone will be safe?

I totally agree. If one's beliefs leads him or her (or zie or hir or whatever other pronoun they insist others use)to mutilate their bodies and embrace an autogynephiliac lifestyle, they are free to do this. But trying to convince others they should do the same (http://4thwavenow.com/2016/01/18/teen-d ... -pressure/), and worse of all not accepting that others might not agree to follow those rules, to the point of wanting to destroy the non-believers in some extreme cases (https://transcriticalhate.wordpress.com), is dead wrong.

If I told you that I was a lycanthrope born in the body of a human, would you accept my "species dysphoria" as legitimate?

I don't mean that every single trans person needs to literally see a psychotherapist, but I do not think transgenderism is compatible with psychological health; it is a complete pseudoscientific fantasy.

Don't pretend you are an advocate for them. You are simply getting your rocks off by character assassination.

Furthermore, you didn't read the study the article you posted linked to. If you did you would see that it refutes your sexual dimorphism comment. When you misrepresent science, or when you use science selectively to further your incredulity, then THAT is what constitutes pseudoscience.

Documented sex/gender* differences in the brain are often taken as support of a sexually dimorphic view of human brains (“female brain” vs. “male brain”), and consequently, of a sexually dimorphic view of human behavior, cognition, personality, attitudes, and other gender characteristics (3). Joel (4, 5) has recently argued that the existence of sex/gender differences in the brain is not sufficient to conclude that human brains belong to two distinct categories.

Here is the entire conclusion.

The lack of internal consistency in human brain and gender characteristics undermines the dimorphic view of human brain and behavior and calls for a shift in our conceptualization of the relations between sex and the brain. Specifically, we should shift from thinking of brains as falling into two classes, one typical of males and the other typical of females, to appreciating the variability of the human brain mosaic. Scientifically, this paradigm shift entails replacing the currently dominant practice of looking for and listing sex/gender differences with analysis methods that take into account the huge variability in the human brain (rather than treat it as noise), as well as individual differences in the specific composition of the brain mosaic. At the social level, adopting a view that acknowledges human variability and diversity has important implications for social debates on long-standing issues such as the desirability of single-sex education and the meaning of sex/gender as a social category.

It's a good idea to do your homework before you douche in public.

Tschüss.

Support the Bob Moog Foundation:https://npo.networkforgood.org/Donate/Donate.aspx?npoSubscriptionId=4043

EricK wrote:The above quote is an appeal to emotion fallacy (fear). Rapists rape...maybe if we don't have ANY public restrooms everyone will be safe?

Actually, statistically speaking, men rape (at least when considering the form involving violence). Women also tend to be physically weaker, and hence more vulnerable in such situations. As I've already said, individual unisex bathrooms are the ideal solution. If I am a bit flippant, it is only because I am not very sympathetic to men (and, let's face it, the vast majority of the trans community is biologically male) demanding access to women's bathrooms (to protect their "feelings"), and then sending incessant death threats to women who feel uncomfortable with this. I am sympathetic to those who have been left in the wake of the transgender mythology, including the many trans who come to regret their decision, or fall into a deeper depression after the awaited "transition" (http://www.theguardian.com/society/2004 ... ntalhealth), as well as their families and loved ones who struggle to cope with it (when your husband becomes a woman, does that make you a lesbian?).

Don't pretend you are an advocate for them. You are simply getting your rocks off by character assassination.

Furthermore, you didn't read the study the article you posted linked to. If you did you would see that it refutes your sexual dimorphism comment. When you misrepresent science, or when you use science selectively to further your incredulity, then THAT is what constitutes pseudoscience.

You yourself seem to have not understood the article, or its relationship to transgenderism. The whole point is that there is no such thing as a gendered brain. You cannot have "the brain of a woman in the body of a man," because there is no such thing as a "woman's brain." But that doesn't mean that men and women don't have distinct bodies (i.e. sexual dimorphism).

Is anyone else just disappointed that we have so many Christian Bible-beaters in the synthesizer community? ...I mean, what a bummer. Particularly, since Christianity tends to pick and choose which science to accept, while steadily rejecting any science that refutes the claims of their holy book. Too often we're told that we have to respect everyones beliefs, but that's not necessarily true. Some people's beliefs convince them that it's okay to rape children, or suicide bomb innocent people, or blow up abortion clinics. Are we to respect these beliefs? Are we to respect the Westboro Baptist Church with all their bigotry and selective hatred?

After all, it's the 21st Century. We have access to all the information one would need to realize that the Bible is pure mythology. In fact, if you do enough research, you'll find that Christianity was originally a psychedelic mushroom fertility cult, in which Christ was actually a personified symbol of the mushroom itself. I know that's hard to swallow for some, but try doing the research before you instinctually reject it. In time, this information and more will become common knowledge.. to the point where only a fact-loathing Trump supporter would still believe in a literal interpretation of the mythological bible. It's very simple to understand this if you want, just eat 5 dried grams of psilocybin alone in silent darkness, and you'll see plenty.

Religion was a necessary tool of evolution to get humanity to a certain point, like feudalism and patriarchy, but now it is out-of-date and completely irrelevant to the modern world...like feudalism and patriarchy. Organized religion is the crutch of moral-barbarians, indirectly supporting Hobbes' claim that we need a social contract to keep the peace. If you're a full-grown adult and you need some ancient book or an invisible daddy in the clouds to keep your morality in check, then you may exhibit some sociopathic traits. A modern, healthy, educated human being does not need a religious practice to inform them that it is wrong to murder, rape, steal, cheat, and hurt others.

Assuming Jesus was real for a second, everything he said really makes the rest of the bible moot. The dude hung out with prostitutes and criminals and welcomed everyone regardless of their station or beliefs. I'm pretty sure he wouldn't give a damn about who was using which restroom. Oh, and if you really want to point to one or two cases where a rapist cross-dressed in order to go in a restroom and seize his victim, then you can't ignore the hundreds of thousands of children who've been repeatedly raped by priests, pastors, and youth ministers. If any organization should be completely shut down because of rape, murder, and abuse, it's the Church. Put the bible down for a second and read a proper history book. From the crusades and the inquisition to the raping priests and the hinderance of scientific progress, Christianity has committed more violent and immoral atrocities than all the atheists, agnostics, and LGBTQs combined.

namahshaman wrote:Is anyone else just disappointed that we have so many Christian Bible-beaters in the synthesizer community? ...I mean, what a bummer. Particularly, since Christianity tends to pick and choose which science to accept, while steadily rejecting any science that refutes the claims of their holy book. Too often we're told that we have to respect everyones beliefs, but that's not necessarily true. Some people's beliefs convince them that it's okay to rape children, or suicide bomb innocent people, or blow up abortion clinics. Are we to respect these beliefs? Are we to respect the Westboro Baptist Church with all their bigotry and selective hatred?

After all, it's the 21st Century. We have access to all the information one would need to realize that the Bible is pure mythology. In fact, if you do enough research, you'll find that Christianity was originally a psychedelic mushroom fertility cult, in which Christ was actually a personified symbol of the mushroom itself. I know that's hard to swallow for some, but try doing the research before you instinctually reject it. In time, this information and more will become common knowledge.. to the point where only a fact-loathing Trump supporter would still believe in a literal interpretation of the mythological bible. It's very simple to understand this if you want, just eat 5 dried grams of psilocybin alone in silent darkness, and you'll see plenty.

Religion was a necessary tool of evolution to get humanity to a certain point, like feudalism and patriarchy, but now it is out-of-date and completely irrelevant to the modern world...like feudalism and patriarchy. Organized religion is the crutch of moral-barbarians, indirectly supporting Hobbes' claim that we need a social contract to keep the peace. If you're a full-grown adult and you need some ancient book or an invisible daddy in the clouds to keep your morality in check, then you may exhibit some sociopathic traits. A modern, healthy, educated human being does not need a religious practice to inform them that it is wrong to murder, rape, steal, cheat, and hurt others.

Assuming Jesus was real for a second, everything he said really makes the rest of the bible moot. The dude hung out with prostitutes and criminals and welcomed everyone regardless of their station or beliefs. I'm pretty sure he wouldn't give a damn about who was using which restroom. Oh, and if you really want to point to one or two cases where a rapist cross-dressed in order to go in a restroom and seize his victim, then you can't ignore the hundreds of thousands of children who've been repeatedly raped by priests, pastors, and youth ministers. If any organization should be completely shut down because of rape, murder, and abuse, it's the Church. Put the bible down for a second and read a proper history book. From the crusades and the inquisition to the raping priests and the hinderance of scientific progress, Christianity has committed more violent and immoral atrocities than all the atheists, agnostics, and LGBTQs combined.

namahshaman wrote:Is anyone else just disappointed that we have so many Christian Bible-beaters in the synthesizer community? ...I mean, what a bummer. Particularly, since Christianity tends to pick and choose which science to accept, while steadily rejecting any science that refutes the claims of their holy book. Too often we're told that we have to respect everyones beliefs, but that's not necessarily true. Some people's beliefs convince them that it's okay to rape children, or suicide bomb innocent people, or blow up abortion clinics. Are we to respect these beliefs? Are we to respect the Westboro Baptist Church with all their bigotry and selective hatred?

After all, it's the 21st Century. We have access to all the information one would need to realize that the Bible is pure mythology. In fact, if you do enough research, you'll find that Christianity was originally a psychedelic mushroom fertility cult, in which Christ was actually a personified symbol of the mushroom itself. I know that's hard to swallow for some, but try doing the research before you instinctually reject it. In time, this information and more will become common knowledge.. to the point where only a fact-loathing Trump supporter would still believe in a literal interpretation of the mythological bible. It's very simple to understand this if you want, just eat 5 dried grams of psilocybin alone in silent darkness, and you'll see plenty.

Religion was a necessary tool of evolution to get humanity to a certain point, like feudalism and patriarchy, but now it is out-of-date and completely irrelevant to the modern world...like feudalism and patriarchy. Organized religion is the crutch of moral-barbarians, indirectly supporting Hobbes' claim that we need a social contract to keep the peace. If you're a full-grown adult and you need some ancient book or an invisible daddy in the clouds to keep your morality in check, then you may exhibit some sociopathic traits. A modern, healthy, educated human being does not need a religious practice to inform them that it is wrong to murder, rape, steal, cheat, and hurt others.

Assuming Jesus was real for a second, everything he said really makes the rest of the bible moot. The dude hung out with prostitutes and criminals and welcomed everyone regardless of their station or beliefs. I'm pretty sure he wouldn't give a damn about who was using which restroom. Oh, and if you really want to point to one or two cases where a rapist cross-dressed in order to go in a restroom and seize his victim, then you can't ignore the hundreds of thousands of children who've been repeatedly raped by priests, pastors, and youth ministers. If any organization should be completely shut down because of rape, murder, and abuse, it's the Church. Put the bible down for a second and read a proper history book. From the crusades and the inquisition to the raping priests and the hinderance of scientific progress, Christianity has committed more violent and immoral atrocities than all the atheists, agnostics, and LGBTQs combined.

Interesting post. I just want to include in the conversation that I am a Christian that does not often fall in line with what organized religion teaches on certain subjects. Not all Christians are like what you have characterized-- I think many are not. I got way into mediations 25 years ago and ended up making spiritual growth the goal of my life. I have studied about and with people from many traditions but about ten years into my journey I hit what seemed like a dead end and could not for the life of me get past it. The dead end was mystical (not mushroom induced but similar in some ways to the effects mushrooms have)-- I had come to a certain place but could get no further.

Long story short it was a Christian monk I met who later became my spiritual director who was able to guide me through the very common stage I was in. He knew exactly where I was and how to get me through that stage and on to better things and his understanding of how to do that was pulled right out of the Bible. Because of this no one could ever convince me that the Bible is not inspired and filled with wisdom despite the historical and cultural problems we find throughout it. His knowledge of mystical states of being is absolutely thorough. I don't think early Christianity was started by a mushroom cult and I base that on the fact that I have known and presently know many people who collectively have had all of the mystical experiences known in Christianity and that some claim come from psychedelics who do not use them. You don't need to ingest chemicals to get into those states and from what I can gather the non chemical induced states have a more permanent effect on the person.

Built into the Christian approach to union with God (think direct experince with mystery) is the need for morals and self control. Getting into those kinds of high states of union with God is not easy and requires a kind of submission of one's whole life in order to get there. This is the main reason for the kinds of moral rules and regulations that we find in Christianity and most of it has to do with bringing the instincts for sex, for security and for social connection into order. Without these hard wired instincts we would not survive as a species but if they become the main pursuit of one's life then attainment of the very delicate and incredibly beautiful and empowering states of consciousness is not possible. This is because it takes sustained desire for a high state of Love and sustained attention on this reality to attain it. This is not possible if money or social power and influence or sexual gratification is driving a person's life.

I believe that connection to these realities and the very concrete and practical changes that they produce in people is the answer to all human suffering. I have dedicated my life to helping others find this hard won transformation. I have yet to see someone who is watching porn on a regular basis, or chasing money through business, or always trying to assert their social importance attain these states. There are very good reasons for the rules within Christianity taken in this context.

I do worry when pornography is considered normal and healthy, when multiple sexual partners becomes common and when a large portion of society has lost touch with any serious consideration of spiritual growth. Most of my worry is centered around my child who I know I can raise to attain these states of consciousness but for whom the entire thrust of society seems to be working against. Having said all of that-- I still want to live in a secular society that gives all people the same rights and the same human dignities and allows people to pursue their own conception of life and its meaning even when and maybe especially when that differs from my own. I just wish we were not always trying to do violence to one another's beliefs and just live and let live.

I have formal training in ante-Nicene Christianity and over 20 books on Christian history/Mediterranean religious syncretism in my library. Nowhere have I EVER seen anything about Christianity being conceived of any mushroom cult.

Support the Bob Moog Foundation:https://npo.networkforgood.org/Donate/Donate.aspx?npoSubscriptionId=4043

I know many women who were assigned female at birth who do not mind sharing bathrooms with their transgender sisters. Why is it that their voice is never heard? Why is it that the vocal minority of bigotry wins out? I don't care if you think you are "helping" them -- you are still hating them. If you believed that Christ preached the hate you spew, you clearly haven't read your own bible. Religious justification of hate is one of the biggest problems in this world. When you believe that your God wants you to hate, you blow off anybody who says you should have compassion. and when you try to mask your hatred as "compassion," it's even easier. Its sad to see the teachings of love and peace perverted to make bigots feel they are right when they hate.

On another note -- personally, I hate communal bathrooms. Whose idea was it that we should not have any privacy in the privy? It's amazing the same people who are so prudish about different lifestyles than their own are so fine with exposing themselves to strangers on a constant basis.

Does it matter at all what any of us think about another persons "junk"? How is this law supposed to protect anyone? Let's explore the law from a practical standpoint and see how works, if it does at all.

As a prophylactic against rape, we hope this law will stop the criminal before they enter the restroom. How is that going to happen? Should we bodily accost overly masculine persons from entering? Should we notify the park ranger when we see large hands on a lady? Is this a license to publicly ridicule people based on their looks or dress, in the name of prevention? "Hey, you don't look like a girl. Are you?", The Good Samaritan asks.

How the heck is this law supposed to work anyway?

But yeah, let's talk about our feelings about other people around us when we pee in public. I was interrupting something important it seems. /s

franklinstower wrote:Its a new idea conceived of by someone (cant remember who) that does mushrooms and saw similarities between those states and pentecost and other Christian mystics. No one really takes it seriously.

Not exactly. Sure, Terence McKenna (perhaps the most experienced authority on psychedelics, along with his brother Dennis, a physicist) popularized the idea. However, the original idea was discovered by a man named John Marco Allegro. He was the leading linguistics expert involved in the translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls. He presents a remarkable amount of evidence for his claim in the book, The Sacred Mushroom and The Cross.

Also, franklinstower, I definitely respect your version of Christianity. Sadly, the majority (certainly the loudest anyway) of Christians are not so "enlightened."

I also agree that the states you speak of are attainable without "chemicals" (as you dismissively referred to them). In fact, I have experienced that without any outside chemicals as well. 12 years ago I fasted in total isolation for 4 days, drinking only water, and meditating and praying. I had an incredible "god" moment, on par with any religious experience I've ever read about. Years later I experienced something very similar (but even more intense) with Dimethyltryptamine. After reading several books about it, and endless books on fasting and meditation practices, I found that the correlation was not just in my head, so to speak, ha. Dr. Rick Strassman wrote a book called, DMT: The Spirit Molecule, in which he actually got permission to do a scientific study on DMT. According to his theory, the pineal gland actually creates and secretes DMT in your brain during deep meditation, near-death and intense religious experiences, and while you dream. He and McKenna both highlighted the molecular similarity between DMT and psilocybin, and how they do basically the same thing to the brain.

My religious experience through isolated fasting and meditation opened my eyes and sent me searching for more. Psychedelic plants however, taught me that religion stops halfway, it doesn't march boldly into the abyss with quite the same pioneering spirit. They also taught me that gurus, priests, monks, etc miss the ultimate point of it all...they get so caught up in piety and righteousness and dogma that they miss the eternal humor of the great comic joke. The mushroom once said to me (that's right, they actually speak to you in a voice...unlike God when you pray ):

"The holy man gets halfway up the mountain and turns around to preach to the people below. The Artist goes all the way to the top, paints a picture of the view, and brings it back down for everyone to see."

By pushing beyond the constraints of religion, psychedelics brought a much clearer understanding that transcended the perception culture had branded on my brain. My family raised me in a Christian church, so I was prone to relate my sober religious experience to symbolism I had learned through church and culture. Psychedelics push you beyond the constraints of culture and religion and politics, even language.

Terence McKenna once said (and I'm paraphrasing), Sure, joining a monastery and choosing a life of celibacy or practicing meditation for years might bring you to these transcendent experiences, maybe... But there is no "maybe" with a large enough dose of the same molecule that you're forcing your brain to produce with a strenuous religious practice.

Besides that, look up the work Timothy Leary did with prison inmates while still working at Harvard. Through mushroom therapy, his team was able to reverse the recidivism rate of the prisoners in the study. A tremendous feat that no amount of priests or chaplains has ever pulled off with inmates.

The main flaw in your rhetoric is that you seem to be considering the two experiences as mutually exclusive, or at the very least, one is superior to the other in your mind. I posit that they are all related and connected, much like all the energies and forces of the Universe. Countless human achievements have resulted from the responsible use of psychedelic plants, these entheogens.

In the words of Terence McKenna (while describing Allegro's discovery), "Jesus was a mushroom."

MoogProg wrote:Does it matter at all what any of us think about another persons "junk"? How is this law supposed to protect anyone? Let's explore the law from a practical standpoint and see how works, if it does at all.

As a prophylactic against rape, we hope this law will stop the criminal before they enter the restroom. How is that going to happen? Should we bodily accost overly masculine persons from entering? Should we notify the park ranger when we see large hands on a lady? Is this a license to publicly ridicule people based on their looks or dress, in the name of prevention? "Hey, you don't look like a girl. Are you?", The Good Samaritan asks.

How the heck is this law supposed to work anyway?

The law doesn't protect anyone. It's still perfectly legal for a cis man to enter a woman's restroom. All it does is stigmatize a group of the populace and uses fear mongering to act like something is being done about rape. It's not doing anything to truly combat the rape culture. It just creates a hypothetical situation and creates a "solution" for it. It's like why we have to take our shoes off in airports, because one guy pretended to have a bomb in his shoe. It doesn't solve a real problem, it just solves an imaginary one. It allows politicians to pat themselves on the back for truly doing nothing about rape and allows the right to persecute a group of people who hasn't gotten their equal rights yet.

And yes, I'm uncomfortable using public restrooms as a cis man in the men's room. And if I can be this uncomfortable, imagine how uncomfortable a trans woman would be forced into the same restroom as cis males. At least in the women's room, there is a small degree of privacy for everyone.